By Stephanie Prosack
The United States of America, the wonderful land where all
men are created equal. Is this sentiment true in higher education? Affirmative
action was created to give scholars of all backgrounds an equal chance of
obtaining a college degree in an ethnically diverse environment. Presently, the
need for affirmative action is debatable, commonly viewed as a process that
helps disadvantaged pupils and creates diversity, or an antiquated concept that
is academically hindering students and institutions alike.
Affirmative action is defined by
Merriam-Webster
as “an active effort to improve the employment or educational opportunities of
members of minority groups and women; also a similar effort to promote the
rights or progress of other disadvantaged persons.” Frequently, it is used as
one criterion to evaluate candidate application admittance to higher education
institutions. People have recently
argued
that affirmative action is unconstitutional because it allows applicants with
lower test scores and grades who are of a minority race to be admitted into institutions
when other applicants with higher grades and tests scores of a different race
are denied admittance. Yet others feel that affirmative action is essential by
allowing campuses to be diverse learning environments.
Although the intentions of affirmative action were initially
positive, demographic dynamics have changed in recent years. Racial groups once
underrepresented in academic institutions, such as Asian-Americans, for
example, are now prevalent in American schools, as stated in
this
intriguing article. Asian-Americans contribute to 5 percent of the U.S.
population and this percentage is increasing. Students born in Asian countries
also attend U.S. institutions. However, with affirmative action, the number of
admitted applicants of this increasing ethnic group is capped off to keep
academic settings diverse.
In addition to monitoring applicant ethnicity, the
evaluation of socio-economic factors could make the process more diverse with
less of an emphasis on race alone. Jane*, Ph.D. and former chemistry faculty
member, believes the admissions process would be fairer to focus on tangibles
such as poverty levels or leadership opportunities. To support this theory Jane
referred to a recent conference where a representative from a science
organization discussed “how some states now have colorblind admission
processes, and minority rates at campuses have increased.” “A policy that
targets at-need individuals and not groups, would be more effective than broad
affirmative action plans,” agrees Tom*, a current chemistry graduate student.
Not only does affirmative action affect higher education
admittance, it also influences academic employment. It is common to see
institutions to identify as an organization that adheres to affirmative action
procedures when filling vacant faculty positions. Try the search terms
“chemistry faculty affirmative action” to view institutions that currently
follow such protocol.
If all applicants were admitted based solely on grades and
test scores, campuses would potentially be dominated by one ethnic group and
lead to fewer ideas and points of view—aspects crucial for a well-rounded
education. Fewer applicants from minority ethnic groups would be present on campuses.
This begs the question: How much more important is diversity over academic
standing?
Please, share your experiences and thoughts!
This post is neither
supporting nor repudiating affirmative action, and does not represent the
beliefs, ideas or thoughts of the American Chemical Society.
*=Names have been
changes to protect identity
So here I am in the last year of my Ph.D. studies
(theoretically!). Graduate school has been long and challenging. I’ve grown in
many ways and there is no way I could’ve predicted the person I would become
and the things that would interest me. When I started my degree, I was 100%
sure that I wanted to become a pharmaceutical researcher. Now I have begun
applying for management consulting, pharmaceuticals, chemical manufacturing,
and even semiconductor manufacturing jobs! Before I even started at my university,
I knew who I wanted my advisor to be. It’s interesting to take a look back now
4 years later and see how things have changed and what I’ve learned. 
Four years later, I think I may have done better being in a
small group with more one-on-one attention from my advisor. This could have
provided me with more mentoring and direction in the process. Being in a larger
group makes it easier to get lost in the crowd. It’s something I see now, but I
don’t think I could’ve really known until it was experienced. Sometimes I feel
like my experience was like being thrown in a pool and then having to teach
myself to swim...it took me a while, but I figured things out. I’m still
figuring some things out. 
